Wing snap at 9,3G ??

[shagrat]

Per the tacview I was not flying Bert aggressively. I don't think I was banking hard either.

I have never flown a real Tomcat, I can't judge the FM but it does look strange that the plane breaks under 9G with a bit of bank.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

That wasn't in answer to you.

I don't say this did not happen to you, or that what we saw on TacView is supposed to happen. We discuss along the line what happened, what went wrong, what maneuvers can lead to it...

From my experience, either there was a network lag due to sync issues (it seems to have happened before and broke wings, but was addressed in a patch a while ago), but I am not sure this happened on a MP server?

The other thing I can think of is the TacView didn't record the whole story? Before the track ends the G forces in your TacView flatline at 9.3 G, which does not look "intentional"...

One big question is usually, can we reproduce this. behavior in a consistent manner. If yes, this can point to a bug. If in the FM, or the sync, or damage model we don't know. But as long as we can repeatedly pull 10 G plus without breaking wings, it does not look very much like a bug in the FM.

My comment was pointed at the inevitable other guy who chimed in reading this thread, having issues with wing snapping and try the "fix the FM so it flies more like my other planes" argument. That is what raised my blood pressure here. ;)

[TomCatMucDe]

That wasn't in answer to you.

I don't say this did not happen to you, or that what we saw on TacView is supposed to happen. We discuss along the line what happened, what went wrong, what maneuvers can lead to it...

From my experience, either there was a network lag due to sync issues (it seems to have happened before and broke wings, but was addressed in a patch a while ago), but I am not sure this happened on a MP server?

The other thing I can think of is the TacView didn't record the whole story? Before the track ends the G forces in your TacView flatline at 9.3 G, which does not look "intentional"...

One big question is usually, can we reproduce this. behavior in a consistent manner. If yes, this can point to a bug. If in the FM, or the sync, or damage model we don't know. But as long as we can repeatedly pull 10 G plus without breaking wings, it does not look very much like a bug in the FM.

My comment was pointed at the inevitable other guy who chimed in reading this thread, having issues with wing snapping and try the "fix the FM so it flies more like my other planes" argument. That is what raised my blood pressure here. ;)

I understand :) no worries

 

This was in SP, in one of the stock missions.

 

The constant 9.3 is in a split second according to tacview, I think it was because my wing broke already. I believe the plane was shown as destroyed only when the RIO bailed out.

 

By the way, it's also the first time that the wing snaps on me and I ve logged some hours in the cat.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

[TLTeo]

Tacview does not accurately capture instantaneous G. if you looked at a DCS track rather than tacview you would find that when the wings came off you were likely pulling 11g or so. If you do that AND at the same time roll the aircraft, even a bit,the wings come off because you exceed structural limits.

[TomCatMucDe]

Tacview does not accurately capture instantaneous G. if you looked at a DCS track rather than tacview you would find that when the wings came off you were likely pulling 11g or so. If you do that AND at the same time roll the aircraft, even a bit,the wings come off because you exceed structural limits.

How come the pilot didn't see any beginning of blackout ?

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

[TLTeo]

Because blackout is caused by sustained G, not instantaneous G (at least in DCS, but it makes sense that it would occur IRL as well).

[Top Jockey]

I think that:

 

- many times people forget the Tomcat doesn't have the same FCS as the Hornet, to prevent them pulling excessive Gs;

- the 9.3 Gs were probably sustained, even if for a brief time period;

- the aircraft total weight at that time was probably somewhat high;

 

While experimenting with the Tomcat, I've hit peaks of 20 Gs (seen a the bottom info bar), and the only thing that got damaged was the INS...

[TomCatMucDe]

- The FCS has nothing to do with this topic.

- what do you mean by sustained? Check the tacview. It was not sustained.

- I was light. No missiles, no drop tanks, 6500lbs of fuel.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

[TomCatMucDe]

I think that:

 

- many times people forget the Tomcat doesn't have the same FCS as the Hornet, to prevent them pulling excessive Gs;

- the 9.3 Gs were probably sustained, even if for a brief time period;

- the aircraft total weight at that time was probably somewhat high;

 

While experimenting with the Tomcat, I've hit peaks of 20 Gs (seen a the bottom info bar), and the only thing that got damaged was the INS...

- The FCS has nothing to do with this topic.

 

- what do you mean by sustained? Check the tacview. It was not sustained.

 

- I was light. No missiles, no drop tanks, 6500lbs of fuel.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

[mwlue]

I have broken my wings in swept mode around 400kts in a tight bank...

 

I did snapped mine once when pulling out from a bombing run, wings not in bomb-sweep mode tho. :joystick:

[Top Jockey]

- The FCS has nothing to do with this topic.

 

- what do you mean by sustained? Check the tacview. It was not sustained.

 

- I was light. No missiles, no drop tanks, 6500lbs of fuel.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

 

Hello,

 

Didn't intend to contradict you, but only used your case to show the impressions I have from other topics along the forum.

 

Believe it or not - I didn't learn to use tacview yet.

 

I do know its "easy" to break the F-14's wings - I've purposedly try to damage the INS with high Gs (to see in what conditions it was possible to repair it).

And although sometimes I've hit peaks of 20 Gs the wings didn't always broke... and in other ocasions they've broke with 11 Gs for instance.

 

My actual DCS version is 2.5.4.29167... the previous one was 2.5.4.29079, maybe the devs tweak with the damage model now and then.

[TomCatMucDe]

Hello,

 

Didn't intend to contradict you, but only used your case to show the impressions I have from other topics along the forum.

 

Believe it or not - I didn't learn to use tacview yet.

 

I do know its "easy" to break the F-14's wings - I've purposedly try to damage the INS with high Gs (to see in what conditions it was possible to repair it).

And although sometimes I've hit peaks of 20 Gs the wings didn't always broke... and in other ocasions they've broke with 11 Gs for instance.

 

My actual DCS version is 2.5.4.29167... the previous one was 2.5.4.29079, maybe the devs tweak with the damage model now and then.

No worries. I just answered your post. I'm interested in a satisfying answer as much as you are :)

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

[Deano87]

As mentioned before, Tacview averages G out over its sample rate, It doesn't do well at catching instantaneous G spikes. I'd be wiling to bet that the actual G that broke your wings was a spike in excess of 12.

[Hummingbird]

I know HB tried to solve the issue last patch, but sadly the wings still sometimes snap at way too low a G load. Last incident for me was a 8.3 G symmetrical pull out, and I was the host of the server. Have pulled as much as 12+ G's without issue several times before, so I know it's not heatblur using incorrect figures or anything like that. Hence there must to be a bug somewhere which can cause micro second over G's to occur.

 

Thankfully there are long periods in between these things happening though, esp. since the last patch, so the last fine tuning of the stress model logic did have an effect.

Edited April 23, 2019 by Hummingbird

[stuart666]

From what I read in the F14A manual, the G limit on the wings in roll was 5.3G with SAS off. Its 6.5 in pitch. Which supports the idea, if you introduce roll into a pitch, you are going to have issues.

[Mods-o_joy]

IRL an F-14 hit 11G with no damage sustained. but ye why do you think 9G wont break anything?

[Hunter Joker]

I managed (have Tacview to show it) to pull 13.5 G without snapping but only 6.6 of pull & roll. So I still think that was the combined force the problem...

 

Inviato dal mio BLA-L09 utilizzando Tapatalk

[shagrat]

I know HB tried to solve the issue last patch, but sadly the wings still sometimes snap at way too low a G load. Last incident for me was a 8.3 G symmetrical pull out, and I was the host of the server. Have pulled as much as 12+ G's without issue several times before, so I know it's not heatblur using incorrect figures or anything like that. Hence there must to be a bug somewhere which can cause micro second over G's to occur.

 

Thankfully there are long periods in between these things happening though, esp. since the last patch, so the last fine tuning of the stress model logic did have an effect.

That is only applying to multiplayer, as it is a sync/latency issue IIRC. So for the OP it does not apply.

[VampireNZ]

I managed (have Tacview to show it) to pull 13.5 G without snapping but only 6.6 of pull & roll. So I still think that was the combined force the problem...

 

Inviato dal mio BLA-L09 utilizzando Tapatalk

 

 

Not sure - I just confirmed via Tacview showing me wings level-ish 10.7 G pull for approx 2-3 seconds and snapped the wings off. :huh: Perhaps that's the max G Tacview can show and it was more? Maybe a tiny bit of roll in there also?

Tacview.rar

Edited April 25, 2019 by VampireNZ

[stuart666]

Ive personally not felt this problem myself, the only times ive pulled the wings off have been gratuitous over g (often when im about to go into a hillside). But if it keeps happening, it makes me wonder if they have made the wings rolling too sensitive in g loading, ie, a fairly trivial amount is being interpreted as a full roll.

 

 

 

Just as a matter of interest, are all you who keep having this happen adjusted the axis at all? Ive got them set at default. Might be worth trying to see if the problem goes away.

[TLTeo]

I kept snapping my wings until I set my curvature from 0 to 10. Haven't snapped them once since then. Also I feel like this needs to be reposted because people keep bringing up Tacview in these threads:

 

 

Tacview does not accurately capture instantaneous G. if you looked at a DCS track rather than tacview you would find that when the wings came off you were likely pulling 11g or so. If you do that AND at the same time roll the aircraft, even a bit,the wings come off because you exceed structural limits.

[Hummingbird]

That is only applying to multiplayer, as it is a sync/latency issue IIRC. So for the OP it does not apply.

 

But as mentioned in this case I was the host of the server.

 

There's no doubt that there was a latency issue before, which perhaps now has been remedied, but there still seems to be occurences of wing breakage at accelerations well below the ultimate load limit of the airframe.

 

Thus I'm thinking that either there's some unseen bug or the stress logic code needs a bit of tweaking still.

 

That said I very rarely experience wing breakage, and I've more times than one pulled 12+ G's without a single issue, hence it shocks me everytime it happens, esp. when it happens as "low" as at 8 G's in a completely clean bird.

Edited April 25, 2019 by Hummingbird

[shagrat]

But as mentioned in this case I was the host of the server.

 

There's no doubt that there was a latency issue before, which perhaps now has been remedied, but there still seems to be occurences of wing breakage at accelerations well below the ultimate load limit of the airframe.

 

Thus I'm thinking that either there's some unseen bug or the stress logic code needs a bit of tweaking still.

 

That said I very rarely experience wing breakage, and I've more times than one pulled 12+ G's without a single issue, hence it shocks me everytime it happens, esp. when it happens as "low" as at 8 G's in a completely clean bird.

As has been discussed in this thread, if you add roll while pulling high Gs the limit is drastically lower!

I usually take care to roll into the bank required and then add pitch and omit pulling hard into any corner... deliberate but smooth. I found that these typical high G turns rarely help you. Instead I simply bleed energy like crazy.

[Hummingbird]

As has been discussed in this thread, if you add roll while pulling high Gs the limit is drastically lower!

I usually take care to roll into the bank required and then add pitch and omit pulling hard into any corner... deliberate but smooth. I found that these typical high G turns rarely help you. Instead I simply bleed energy like crazy.

 

Yes, I explained this myself just earlier and I know not to roll in a high G turn, but even so the ultimate load limit doesn't go from 13+ to just 8 G with a just a little roll input. Finally in my case the breakages were under fully symmetrical loads, i.e. not roll inputs at all.